Hand Control With Invasive Feedback Is Not Impaired by Increased Cognitive Load

Recent experiments have shown that neural stimulation can successfully restore sensory feedback in upper-limb amputees improving their ability to control the prosthesis. However, the potential advantages of invasive sensory feedback with respect to non-invasive solutions have not been yet identified. Our hypothesis was that a difference would appear when the subject cannot focus all the attention to the use of the prosthesis, but some additional activities require his/her cognitive attention, which is a quite common situation in real-life conditions. To verify this hypothesis, we asked a trans-radial amputee, equipped with a bidirectional hand prosthesis, to perform motor tasks also in combination with a cognitive task. Sensory feedback was provided via intraneural (invasive) or electro-tactile (non-invasive) stimulation. We collected also data related to self-confidence. While both approaches were able to significantly improve the motor performance of the subject when no additional cognitive effort was asked, the manual accuracy was not affected by the cognitive task only when intraneural feedback was provided. The highest self-confidence was obtained when intraneural sensory feedback was provided. Our findings show that intraneural sensory feedback is more robust to dual tasks than non-invasive feedback. This is the first direct comparison between invasive and non-invasive approaches for restoring sensory feedback and it could suggest an advantage of using invasive solutions. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02848846.

[1]  Silvestro Micera,et al.  Biomimetic Intraneural Sensory Feedback Enhances Sensation Naturalness, Tactile Sensitivity, and Manual Dexterity in a Bidirectional Prosthesis , 2018, Neuron.

[2]  Therese M Meyer,et al.  Psychological aspects of mutilating hand injuries. , 2003, Hand clinics.

[3]  M. Land,et al.  The Roles of Vision and Eye Movements in the Control of Activities of Daily Living , 1998, Perception.

[4]  G A Clark,et al.  Restoring motor control and sensory feedback in people with upper extremity amputations using arrays of 96 microelectrodes implanted in the median and ulnar nerves , 2016, Journal of neural engineering.

[5]  Silvestro Micera,et al.  A closed-loop hand prosthesis with simultaneous intraneural tactile and position feedback , 2018, Science Robotics.

[6]  Jacob L. Segil,et al.  Mechanical design and performance specifications of anthropomorphic prosthetic hands: a review. , 2013, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[7]  Bill Macken,et al.  Questioning short-term memory and its measurement: Why digit span measures long-term associative learning , 2015, Cognition.

[8]  J. Czerniecki,et al.  Does having a computerized prosthetic knee influence cognitive performance during amputee walking? , 2006, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[9]  G Baud-Bovy,et al.  Optimal integration of intraneural somatosensory feedback with visual information: a single-case study , 2019, Scientific Reports.

[10]  Marsha C. Lovett,et al.  A source activation theory of working memory: cross-task prediction of performance in ACT-R , 2000, Cognitive Systems Research.

[11]  Rafael Granja-Vazquez,et al.  Illusory movement perception improves motor control for prosthetic hands , 2018, Science Translational Medicine.

[12]  Jason Friedman,et al.  Evaluation of the effects of adding vibrotactile feedback to myoelectric prosthesis users on performance and visual attention in a dual-task paradigm , 2018 .

[13]  M. Keith,et al.  A neural interface provides long-term stable natural touch perception , 2014, Science Translational Medicine.

[14]  W. Sturm,et al.  Neuropsychological assessment , 2007, Journal of Neurology.

[15]  Silvestro Micera,et al.  Six‐Month Assessment of a Hand Prosthesis with Intraneural Tactile Feedback , 2018, Annals of neurology.

[16]  Luca Citi,et al.  Restoring Natural Sensory Feedback in Real-Time Bidirectional Hand Prostheses , 2014, Science Translational Medicine.

[17]  Christian Cipriani,et al.  Non-Invasive, Temporally Discrete Feedback of Object Contact and Release Improves Grasp Control of Closed-Loop Myoelectric Transradial Prostheses , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[18]  Elizaveta V Okorokova,et al.  Biomimetic encoding model for restoring touch in bionic hands through a nerve interface , 2018, Journal of neural engineering.

[19]  E. Biddiss,et al.  Upper limb prosthesis use and abandonment: A survey of the last 25 years , 2007, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[20]  Nitish V. Thakor,et al.  Prosthesis with neuromorphic multilayered e-dermis perceives touch and pain , 2018, Science Robotics.

[21]  Silvestro Micera,et al.  A somatotopic bidirectional hand prosthesis with transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation based sensory feedback , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[22]  Dustin J Tyler,et al.  Artificial tactile and proprioceptive feedback improves performance and confidence on object identification tasks , 2018, PloS one.

[23]  Jason Friedman,et al.  Evaluation of the effects of adding vibrotactile feedback to myoelectric prosthesis users on performance and visual attention in a dual-task paradigm , 2018, Clinical rehabilitation.

[24]  A. Benton,et al.  Revised administration and scoring of the digit span test. , 1957, Journal of consulting psychology.